The judge threw out the plea arrangement because the prosecutor was attempting to force the judge to be the final arbiter of Hunter Biden’s compliance with the terms of the plea arrangement to determine any future wrongdoing with respect to a possible gun charge against Biden in the future. Also, Republicans were pissed off he wasn’t paying a higher price.
From the article:
U.S. District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, raised multiple concerns about the specifics of the deal and her role in the proceedings. The plan also included an agreement on a separate gun charge — Biden has been accused of possessing a firearm in 2018 as a drug user. As long as he adhered to the terms of his agreement, the gun case was to be wiped from his record. Otherwise, the felony charge carries 10 years in prison.
(Emphasis mine.)
These kinds of deliberately misleading statements such as I quoted from you above is why no one trusts your cites or your rhetoric.
Because the IRS wants voluntary compliance- and the money. You dont earn much or pay much taxes in prison. So mostly only tax protestors and those that tell others to cheat actually go to prison.
Remember, the IRS rarely prosecutes in Criminal court anyway.
And yeah, if you are like Snipes, Snipes was convicted on misdemeanor charges of willful failure to file federal income tax returns in 2008, and was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. After an unsuccessful appeal, he served 28 months in federal prison. He was released in April 2013.[32][33]
On October 12, 2006, Snipes, Eddie Ray Kahn, and Douglas P. Rosile were charged with one count of conspiring to defraud the United States and one count of knowingly making or aiding and abetting the making of a false and fraudulent claim for payment against the United States. Snipes was also charged with six counts of willfully failing to file timely federal income tax returns.[34] The conspiracy charge against Snipes alleged that he agreed with Kahn and Rosile to file a false amended return, including a false tax refund claim of over $4 million for the year 1996, and a false amended return, including a false tax refund claim of over US$7.3 million for the year 1997. The government alleged that Snipes, on Kahn’s advice and with Rosile’s assistance, attempted to obtain fraudulent tax refunds using a tax protester theory called the “861 argument” (essentially, an argument that the domestic income of U.S. citizens and residents is not taxable). The government alleged that Snipes sent three worthless, fictitious “bills of exchange” for $14 million to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).[35]
The indictment also charged that Snipes failed to file tax returns for any of the years 1999 through 2004. Snipes responded to his indictment in a letter on December 4, 2006, declaring himself to be “a non-resident alien” of the United States; in reality, Snipes is a birthright U.S. citizen.[36] Such tactics are common of the “Freemen”, “Sovereign Citizen”, or “OPCA” (Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument) category of litigation strategy.[37]
Snipes retained Milwaukee attorney Robert Bernhoft to represent him at trial.[38] Following a jury trial where he was defended by Bernhoft and his then-associate Robert Barnes,[39] Snipes was acquitted on February 1, 2008, of the felony count of conspiracy to defraud the United States and on the felony count of filing a false claim with the government. He was found guilty on three misdemeanor counts of failing to file federal income tax returns (and acquitted on three other failure-to-file charges) under 26 U.S.C.§ 7203. His co-defendants, Douglas P. Rosile and Eddie Ray Kahn, were convicted on the conspiracy and false claim charges in connection with the income tax refund claims they filed for Snipes.[40][41]
Note that Snipes went to trial and continued his bogus tax protester arguments, he refused to pay and stated he didnt have to file. Quite a few do. He did not admit guilt and promise to pay and file. And so did his two co-defendants. So, they went to prison.
Hunter (in the initial deal) admitted guilt, paid up, and promised to file and pay thereafter.
See the difference?
Correct. Most people admit guilt, promise to pay and file and get a suspended sentence or no prison time.
Not to mention two IRS 'whistleblowers" broke Federal law and lied their asses off to Congress- and the press
Assuming the newspapers have no clue what the difference is, I think we can assume it might be tax evasion unless we see the indictment. Looking it up, it seems like tax evasion is using illegal means to pay less taxes whereas tax fraud is deliberately lying on your tax form. If he did not file returns then it would have to be ipso facto evasion not fraud (vacuously not lying) UNLESS the non-filing itself is considered legally fraud.
Not sure where you are going with that. If I rob a bank and admit I did it, paid the money back and promise never to rob a bank again, are you saying I shouldn’t be put on trial?
Now, if I were writing this script, Hunter would say “Okay, Dad, don’t forget: you publicly say 'NO ONE’s above the law. If my kid’s guilty, he should get thrown in the slammer.” You hug me, say you love me… and then you kick me in the butt and say “THAT’S what kids these days need!”
And that’s what happens in front of Congress, who give a standing ovation. Roberts, Alito and Thomas walk in yelling “NOT guilty!” and the Republican candidates, and the entire state of Iowa, are shown throwing their straw hats in the air.
That’s why I said I didn’t know where he was going with his statement. It seems like he said if you commit a crime BUT you say you did it, pay the money back and promise you won’t do it again then you’re good and shouldn’t be tried. The bank robbery was just an analogy to see if that is what he is really saying. Maybe he meant they should be more lenient? Or “Trump sux!”? Or maybe he thinks the analogy is a non-sequitur since tax fraud is a white collar crime and bank robbery isn’t. I don’t know since he didn’t finish his point.
Again, it was another example of a crime like tax fraud used as an analogy. Never said he really robbed a bank.
Good, because otherwise it’s like arguing that someone shouldn’t get a warning for speeding because you wouldn’t give a murderer a warning.
In a robbery you are taking from people using force (or the threat of force). With tax crimes, you’re failing to pay back a debt you owe. So, in that circumstance paying the money you owe makes sense as a mitigating factor when prosecuting someone.
Obviously you don’t just automatically say every time that if you pay what you owe then you’re good. Otherwise there is no incentive to file in a timely fashion or to pay the full and accurate amount when you do. And when the person employs deception in an attempt to avoid paying, that’s an additional layer of malfeasance that you want to dissuade people from engaging in. So you add on fees (which usually is an appropriate punishment when the issue is about money in the first place) and only include incarceration for the most extreme cases.
That seems like a very logical way to handle these cases and the IRS has functioned that way for decades.
In tax FRAUD you are intentionally doing something to hide the money. In this case, setting up shell accounts and whatever else they were doing.
Look, we’re all just speculating on what will actually happen. I have no idea. He could walk, or he could get five years. I dunno. I think I have done a good job of laying out the issues, the history, and the penalties for various tax offenses.
This all started with me refuting the claim that ‘almost no one’ gets jail time after being convicted of tax evasion or tax fraud, and therefore if Hunter got jail time it would be a travesty of justice. Those are the DNC talking points, being reiterated here uncritically. They are wrong.
I think this is a good summary of the truth: Of the investigations launched into tax fraud, very few may result in a conviction. But of those people convicted of ax fraud, 2/3 of them go to jail, for an average length of 16 months.
Possibly. It runs a range of severity, which is why it’s sometimes prosecuted as a crime and other times pursued as a civil matter.
One form of tax fraud, for example, is not filing when you know you’re supposed to. No hiding, no shell accounts, no phony paperwork. Just not filing. If they can prove you knew you were supposed to and chose not to, that can be pursued as fraud. That’s called a willful failure to file taxes.
And yes, you can in theory go to jail for up to a year for that. It’s considered a misdemeanor crime. Now, if you’re dealing with larger amounts as listed under section 6050I:
It can be upgraded to a felony, and can give up to 5 years in prison.
I don’t think we know the particulars at this point. But I don’t think we can assume all the cloak and dagger stuff yet.
After consultation with a fellow moderator, I’m going to apologize to the participants of this thread for making the above statement in P&E, when it is more appropriate for the Pit.